Skip to content
Vote Solar at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Vote Solar

Vote Solar's mission is to realize a 100% clean energy future through a solutions-driven, people-first approach.

$95k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$43k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$1.2MCommunity Improvement$7k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $88,125, the rows itemized in this filing. The $94,625 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $6,500 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $82k
$19,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Gridlab$42,625
Community Power$19,500
Soulardarity$19,500
Illinois Peoples Action$6,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Community Power: $20k → 7%Gridlab: $43k → 10%Solar Rights Alliance: $35k → 11%Enviro Justice CoalitionWater: $18k → 12%Solar United Neighbors: $280k → 14%Soulardarity: $20k → 21%Center for Energy Education: $10k → 20%Illinois Peoples Action: $7k → 11%Solar United Neighbors: $280k → 14%Solar United Neighbors: $250k → 14%Solar United Neighbors: $250k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Arizonans for a Clean Economy

Arizonans for a Clean Economy is a coalition of residents and businesses who believe Arizona should lead the nation in energy independence. We educate Arizonans about the benefits of homegrown energy, mobilize supporters to advocate for…

—
2
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
3
Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies

CEERT designs and fights for policies that advance clean, renewable, energy and climate solutions for California and the West. CEERT's team of professional staff, active board members, expert consultants, and clean-technology and…

Environment
4
California Energy Alliance

The California Energy Alliance (CEA) unites representatives of a broad range of organizations concerned about energy and the build environment. As a member-based organization, CEA works to improve California's energy future and migration…

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Solar United Neighbors Action

Promoting rooftop and distributed solar and associated technologies to create a just and equitable transition to clean energy.

Environment
6
Californians for Energy and Science

To provide californians with accurate, science-based information about energy and climate issues, enabling informed decision-making for our state's energy future. we believe that through education and transparent research, we can help…

Education
7
Educator Collective for Envionmental Justice Inc

Environmental Justice & Equality

Education
8
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
9
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
10
Community Power New Mexico
Community Improvement
11
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
12
California Interfaith Power & Light

California Interfaith Power & Light inspires and mobilizes individuals and communities of faith and conscience to take boldand justaction on climate change.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Solar United Neighbors Inc; the most unlike its peers is Illinois Peoples Action. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Solar United Neighbors Inc: $1,060,000 · EnvironmentSolar United Neighbors IncGridLab Inc: $42,625 · Environment+4 more: $83,500 · Environment+4 moreENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION FOR WATER: $18,000 · OtherILLINOIS PEOPLES ACTION: $6,500 · Community Improvement
Environment$1,186,125Other$18,000Community Improvement$6,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSolar United Neighbors Inc: $1,060,000 over 4y, 6.5% of budgetGridLab Inc: $42,625 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSOLAR RIGHTS ALLIANCE: $35,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY POWER: $19,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetSOULARDARITY: $19,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR ENERGY EDUCATION FKA SOLAR CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE: $9,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetILLINOIS PEOPLES ACTION: $6,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Energy FoundationUnited States Energy …Windward FundNew Venture FundFidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Energy FoundationCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Energy Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · New Venture Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Vote Solar funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Vote Solar. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 8 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $5k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Vote Solar’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home